They are supposed to be geopolitical arch-rivals. They are also historical opponents. And especially during the last years they have often engaged in heated diplomatic — or not so diplomatic — exchanges. However, as of late they seem to be collaborating harmoniously in Syria.
Israel and Turkey relations have been on the edge for quite some time. While Tel Aviv is waging war against what it sees as an existential threat in Gaza and Lebanon, Ankara is keen on marketing itself as the champion and protector of Muslims in the Middle East, taking under its wing the Palestinian cause.
Animosity runs deep. Only a month ago, Turkish President Erdogan announced his decision to cut ties with Israel. “We, as the Republic of Turkey and its government, have currently severed all relations with Israel”, he said, as he put forward a trade embargo and a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.
As the Turkish government formally recalled its ambassador to Israel for consultations and Israel evacuated its embassy in Ankara for security reasons, Erdogan vowed to do everything in his power to hold the Israeli Prime Minister accountable for the Gaza “genocide”.
On his part, Benjamin Netanyahu has called Erdogan “Turkey’s dictator” in a tweet where he added that “he attacks Israel’s democracy while Turkish journalists and judges fill his prisons”. As for his firebrand son, Yair, he went as far as tweeting that “Istanbul is actually a city called Constantinople!”.
“Netanyahu and Erdogan compete to be the Middle East’s strongmen”, wrote Gideon Rachman of The Financial Times a few days ago. Yet this may not be exactly so. Competition is there, of course. But at the same time, so is collaboration.
As US President-elect Donald Trump noted on Monday, Turkey holds the key to Syria. Ankara put its full weight behind the Hayat Tahrir al Sham and the Syrian National Army rebranded jihadists. It provided them with training, equipment, intelligence and logistical support – and to a significant extent it now calls the shots in Damascus.
As Turkey has now managed to control directly a vast area in the north of Syria, the Cyprus precedent comes to mind: Sooner or later it is expected to de facto – or even de jure, after a referendum – annex the land that its proxy forces have captured.
But Turkey is not the only Syrian neighbour to have taken advantage of Assad’s downfall. Israel has also invaded, sending elite brigades (one of them named Golani – same as the Islamist HTS leader) tens of kilometres into the Golan, so as to create a “buffer zone” for “security purposes”. Local Druze populations are already calling for the annexation of the area by Israel.
At the same time, during the last couple of weeks several hundreds of sorties by the Israeli Air Force have demolished the Assad government’s military infrastructure, facilities, equipment and stockpiles. The defence capabilities of the former Iranian ally, which was pivotal as a liaison between Tehran and its proxy forces in Lebanon, have been reduced to rubble.
Interestingly enough, the rebranded jihadist “rebels” who have assumed power in Syria have not really reacted to the relentless Israeli pounding. No calls to arms against the “Zionist enemy”. No vows to free Jerusalem. No pledges to recapture the Syrian land that has been seized by Israel’s Defence Forces. Almost business as usual for the descendants of the Islamic State.
Cynicism and realpolitik prevail. Why oppose the Jewish campaign which annihilates any remnants of the Baathist military capability? Same as Turkey, Israel has essentially been backing the Islamists on the ground. Same as Turkey, Israel wishes to carve itself a piece of the fallen Syrian state.
Amorality is the name of the game. Erdogan has been doing business with HTS, an organisation that his government officially designates as terrorist. Netanyahu has all but joined forces with the offshoots of Al Qaeda. And while pursuing their respective endeavours, Israel and Turkey have found themselves effectively on the same side.
Of course, Tel Aviv and Ankara are sure to clash again in the future with regard to the establishment of a Kurdish state in the region – which President-elect Trump has openly put on the table. At the moment, however, they can be the best of enemies. Both wanted Assad out and both are now in for the spoils.
As the lines on the map that were drawn by the Anglo-French Sykes-Picot treaty a century ago are now being redrawn, Erdogan and Netanyahu are both angling for a legacy as the leaders to expand their countries’ borders for the first time in decades.
The endgame is what matters most. The Turkish President aims at restoring the Ottoman Empire, while the Israeli Prime Minister is eyeing a Greater Israel. As it turns out, en route to achieving their goals the two adversaries can occasionally prove very useful to each other.
Brexiteers voted ‘Out!’ but are left still tied to foreign regulators they did not elect